You are actually correct. Sid is not rolling. It is never technically put into freeze like Testing before release, but since Unstable's main purpose is to act as a staging area for Testing, it is effectively frozen at the same time as Testing. Unstable may have slightly newer versions of some packages during a freeze, or even packages that were removed from Testing because they were deemed too unstable or buggy for release, but no major new software versions are introduced. (For example, GNOME 3.4 is in both Sid and Wheezy even though GNOME 3.6 is considered stable upstream.) Once Wheezy is released, Sid will be forked to become the basis for Jesse, then it will effectively be unfrozen.

There are actually several proposals to create a truly rolling branch of Debian that are often brought up around release time. The consensus, at the moment at least, seems to be that creating a rolling release would distract developers from fixing release-critical bugs - thus preventing Testing from being released in a timely manner - and generally reduce the quality of Debian as a whole.

Canonical might be able to pull off a rolling release of Ubuntu with some software that they maintain internally, such as Unity or the Linux kernel, but they don't have the resources to independently maintain every package in the Debian archive. I think that their "rolling release" will focus mainly on a few key packages that Canonical themselves maintain, and the remainder will be maintained by regular imports from Sid. Effectively, Ubuntu's rolling release will semi-freeze the same way Sid does, though possibly to a lesser extent, when Debian freezes Testing. The only practical way around that limitation would be for Debian to create a true rolling-release branch, which isn't likely to happen, or Canonical to re-base on another distribution, which is even less likely to happen.

Debian in my opinion has a slighty different Market to Ubuntu, "rolling release" and "stable" does not always go well hand in hand.

I completely agree. I'm definitely against Debian adding a rolling-release repository. Fortunately, it seems that the vast majority of Debian Developers agree with me.

Canonical, on the other hand, might be able to pull it off. My last post might have made it sound a little like I'm against Ubuntu becoming a rolling distribution: I'm not. I merely pointed out some of the challenges they will face making that happen. That said, I'm sure they've thought it through.

I've seen some nods from the Fedora camp that they may move into rolling releases, or at least offer both stable releases and a rolling release. They currently have something like that (rawhide) but it's not an official rolling release.
Based on my experience with Arch on a pogoplug, rolling releases need to be improved a bit but there is a lot of promise there as long as they roll smoother than a square tire.

Now I based my information on distrowatch and I understand the time between today and the rolling release but it is my opinion that the stability / cutting edge mixture they have currently adopted (and usability) is what brought Ubuntu to the fore-front of popularity.

The Ubuntu distro losing popularity and I am sure many have opinions why - changing the release strategy might not be the move to reverse the path they are on.

Perhaps current adopters might have a fluctuation but the "windows" converts will be further distanced and for those who are looking for a "light" distro may leave.

This is a wild statement but I have always felt that Ubuntu provided the strengths of Linux without the feel and complexity.

This is not to say Ubuntu is limiting - clearly it can be used by hardcore / new comers a like.

To back step a little I missed the fact LTS releases will sexist but I would still expect on some level windows converts will be entangled with this concept of "most recent release" and the expectation of everything being close to perfect.

Now I based my information on distrowatch and I understand the time between today and the rolling release but it is my opinion that the stability / cutting edge mixture they have currently adopted (and usability) is what brought Ubuntu to the fore-front of popularity.

The Ubuntu distro losing popularity and I am sure many have opinions why - changing the release strategy might not be the move to reverse the path they are on.

I don't think Ubuntu cares about the desktop anymore. They are more focused on mobile now.

Explanation? I only heard on Ubuntu phones, nothing else. What else are they breaking upon?

let's see, ubuntu one is a good example. netbooks used to have their own version. there was the previous ubuntu phone (android but housed the full ubuntu OS which you could use by docking the phone to a monitor. still want to see this be a reality personally)

i believe there were a few other things they did or were talking about doing as well, but those are just a few off the top of my head